The true moral recognition of & # 39; Making a Murderer Part 2 & # 39 ;: Review

adminOctober 19, 2018




A few years ago, two sensations of true crime took over our culture like a fever.

First was Making a murderer, whose popularity not only led Netflix to become the place to turn to true crime documents, but also launched a thousand Reddit threads of amateur detectives debating the innocence of Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey. Only a year later, our obsession was exacerbated by Serial Season 1, which launched even more voracious Internet detective.

But while these two sensations allowed audiences to revel in the murder mystery of a real-life victim, their subsequent seasons in 2018 are more like a moral calculation.

Serial Season 3 is no longer just a case of murder, but the number of cases of a full court, ranging from minor to major crimes, which are explored week after week. Similary, Making an Assassin Part 2 It is a more serious and measured look at the bureaucracy involved in trying to free two potentially unjustly condemned men.

But by the very nature of what it seems, a story undoubtedly more boring than the original, Making an Assassin Part 2 It feels like a meta comment about the ethics of true crime phenomena in general.

Why do we love the real crime? Innumerable podcasts and documents affirm that it is because we are people who seek justice in an unjust and corrupt system. But after observing for more than ten exhausting hours the long efforts that the legal representatives of Avery and Dassey must try to correct their supposed injustices, one realizes something.

That's a lot of shit.

In Making an Assassin Part 2, The veil falls, but not only on the failures of our legal system. The veil falls to show our own cruel reflection.

We are not in this to hear the endless renewal of when Teresa Halbach's car was found, or if several different appellate courts can agree that Dassey's confession was coerced. Neither are we doing it, as both the prosecution and the attorneys who seem to be sincere in the Innocence Project suggest, doing all this for the duty of finding justice for Halbach's dreadful death.

In Making an Assassin Part 2, The veil falls, but not only on the failures of our legal system. The veil falls to show our own cruel reflection.

Part of this follow up seems that the filmmakers struggle to reconcile with the phenomenon they started. The first episode lists the numerous criticisms that the original document received: namely, that the filmmakers did not include evidence that made Avery appear guilty and that he was not considered with the victim who lost his life and with the loved ones who survived it. .

The most uncomfortable thing is that there is a heavy use of breathless news coverage that has followed the case since the Netflix program took off. There are scenes of demonstrations organized by supporters of Avery and Dassey, and interviews with street detectives who offer their own predictions about their innocence or guilt, as if they were talking about the outcome of a great sports game.

& # 39; Making a Murderer: Part 2 & # 39; turn the camera inward and towards your own audience

& # 39; Making a Murderer: Part 2 & # 39; turn the camera inward and towards your own audience

It is revealing that one of the most chilling moments of this documentary happens in the background of an interview with Ken Kratz, the controversial and unfortunate district attorney who acted as prosecutor during the original murder trial and who declared Avery guilty of the murder of Halbach .

He's at CrimeCon, the reporter says, and as Kratz tells his emphatic story of why Avery is a cold and insensitive psychopath, you see a CrimeCon assistant in the background taking advantage of the photo convention opportunity. When Kratz falsely invokes the poor and unfortunate specter of the victim Halbach, the woman in the background happily appears in the false police profile of a corpse, probably for the gram.

Regardless of whether the filmmakers wanted it or not, it is a disgusting and self reflective moment. Are we her? Are we the ones who cheerfully give men like Kratz a platform (who wrote and sold a book about Avery, after giving up his position after a horrific sexting scandal with a client), while we delight and delight with the deaths of victims of the real world?

Objectively, Making an Assassin Part 2 It is a story less well told.

But maybe that's too uncharitable for fans of Making a killer and the real crime in general (myself included).

Objectively, Making an Assassin Part 2 It is a story less well told. Unlike season 3 of Serial, which still finds human history even in the most litigious cases of the courts, the monitoring of Making a killer he often fails to communicate the enormity of his human bets moment by moment, especially during most of the first seven episodes.

The reasons why they are not difficult to understand. This is not the coherent history of carefully distributed information, taking advantage of the innumerable twists and turns of this case. Clearly, the filmmakers had less time and material to work with, especially when it came to accessing the devastating and heartbreaking effect that these cases have on the fathers of condemned men.

The sincere love between Avery and her parents remains a heartbreaking refrain in this follow-up.

The sincere love between Avery and her parents remains a heartbreaking refrain in this follow-up.

In general, there are fewer human ties for audiences to connect, which would facilitate attention when legal jargon becomes too much. It relies heavily on the title cards that summarize the legal failures and successes on this trip to nullify your convictions, rather than allowing audiences to experience it and observe how the action unfolds in real time.

Maybe one of the biggest problems with Making an Assassin Part 2 It is that it feels mandatory.

We feel compelled to see it, as people who have become obsessed with every minor detail of the case. It feels as if the filmmakers feel compelled to show a more "neutral" perspective (although I have doubts about it) and to become more aware of the ethical criticisms raised by the original documentary.

And you can not help but feel that Netflix had a great interest in seeing one of its biggest successes return as soon as possible, no matter what the impact of quality. Make Part 2 Do you need ten episodes that often last more than an hour? Absolutely not. At the level of pure entertainment, it only begins to capture attention in the last episodes, when Avery's star lawyer (and the controversial protagonist of the season), Kathleen Zellner becomes the cause of who killed Halbach.

We return again to the original concern of Making a killer as a phenomenon.

But now we go back to the original restlessness of Making a killer As a general phenomenon.

The first season placed the observers almost like amateur juries, showing in their first episodes how susceptible we can be to the compelling narrative of a prosecution to a guilty verdict, despite very little substantial evidence. But he fought this story, as a defense lawyer would, by providing us with an equally seductive narrative of serious injustice and institutional corruption of the police.

I do not know how comfortable I am with saying Making an Assassin Part 2 It only gets really good when the tables again blame another man for Halbach's murder. Even if the evidence is convincing, was not that what started all this mess in the first place?

It is disgusting to try to judge the entertainment value of a story that deals with what is at stake in real life lives and deaths of people.

There are many less gyrations worthy of binge in Making an Assassin Part 2. But when you talk about the ruined lives of two potentially innocent men, should we have that story told in a way that forces us to worry, or ignite the kind of mob-like justice that characterizes Internet research of the fans?

Should not. But we do it.

Https% 3a% 2f% 2fvdist.aws.mashable.com% 2fcms% 2f2017% 2f5% 2f2b480e28 0670 b338% 2fthumb% 2f00001



Source link

Categories